jakarta
Well-known member
So You don't live in a County then?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Cricket] The Hundred
- Thread starter crodonilson
- Start date
So You don't live in a County then?
The ECBs accountants can though which is why they like The Hundred.
I'll prepare for the worst with this post but I enjoyed The Hundred. I didn't want to and didn't think I would but the matches I saw I enjoyed. Only part I didn't particularly like was as I live in Hove my nearest team was actually Oval Invincibles rather than Southern Brave. Really wished there was a more SE England team to cover Kent/Sussex/SE London so I could support them.
So they decided that there will 10 balls from each end at a time which can be bowled by the same bowler or swapped at 5 balls to another bowler who can then trot down the other end and bowl another 5. OK
Sid in the Sharknado
New member
India don't play the IPL during the Ranji Trophy though, the first class season ends in March and then the IPL starts (normally, obviously it's a bit messed up at the moment with covid).
Australia, who do play the Big Bash during the height of their summer, have exactly the same problems England are currently suffering of not playing first class cricket during test series. Australia's test batting is appalling, if you consider what their line up would look like without Steve Smith (even if he was replaced with a good player who averaged 40-odd) it's probably worse than England's. Australia lost a home series to India for the first time this year, despite the Indian team they faced being much weaker than the one we're playing at the moment.
The counties (Surrey apart) are already heavily subsidised by the ECB. If they wanted to play the championship in the middle of the summer it's entirely within their power to do so and always has been.
Taking the best players out of the county squads can only serve to reduce the quality of the other competitions, and to reduce their value. It's not possible to take the players out for a test series and The Hundred, and to run a competitive championship programme at the same time. And taking the best players out of the county squads to play in a much more high profile competition can only serve to devalue the county system and encourage players to emphasise the skills that will get them picked for the Hundred.
Whatever the ECB have claimed over the last few years about the primacy of test cricket, it simply isn't reflected in their approach to county cricket or the England team fixtures or selection.
sams dad
I hate Palarse
I enjoy watching cricket at all levels from village green to Test match, so I saw The Hundred as another opportunity to watch a sport I love.
I saw some great batting, some great bowling, some excellent fielding, and some fantastic catches. I didn't "support" any particular team, although it was nice to see a couple of Sussex players help the Southern Brave take the trophy, so I watched as a neutral, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
I saw some great batting, some great bowling, some excellent fielding, and some fantastic catches. I didn't "support" any particular team, although it was nice to see a couple of Sussex players help the Southern Brave take the trophy, so I watched as a neutral, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
KeegansHairPiece
New member
- Jan 28, 2016
- 1,829
The issue is 1 county having responsibility for all formats. It’s in their interest to prosper in the most profitable.
So, your point about best players getting selected for franchises - that is true, but if their only path to getting into franchise cricket is success with their counties - it means success in the longer formats first and foremost. The current system means young cricketers are making their name in T20s, getting franchises then lost to longer form cricket.
Of course quality in cricket ebbs and flows, but while Australia have had a few problems, we’ve not been able to find an opening partnership since Cook and Strauss. We haven’t found a settled top 3 for 4 or 5 years. This is starting to go well passed ebbs and flows. We’ll see how bad Australia are in a few months.
Sid in the Sharknado
New member
It wasn't an issue for the 10years or so between the start of the T20 Cup and whenever exactly it was the Champiomship started being seriously forced out of the middle of the season. It wasn't a particular issue after the start of the Gillette Cup either. The teams who you could reasonably accuse of focusing unduly on the T20 (Leics, Hants, Northants come immediately to mind) have never been good at producing batsmen for the Test team anyway (off the top of my head I can't think of a batsman Hampshire have actually produced for the test team between Phil Mead and James Vince, who was born in Sussex and went to school in Wiltshire). By contrast the ECB have regularly shat on counties like Durham or Somerset who have actually managed to produce decent players in recent years.
While that idea sounds marvelous in theory, in practice it reduces the counties to a production line for limited overs teams (and the chances are players will still primarily practice the skills required for t20 matches, since the ability to block out a day on a turning pitch at Taunton won't attract many bids from franchises). Unless you spread the Hundred/T20 competition through the season and allow championship matches in between, you'll always be forced to play the championship outside the main summer weeks. And if you spread it out like that you can't have entirely separate teams because it's not practical to constantly be shuffling the squads around.
Seriously, look at the batting averages for the last ashes series - https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...ing_bowling_by_team.html?id=12492;type=series
Steve Smith scored 774 runs at 110. The next best was Labuschagne with 350 at 50 (no hundreds) and then there's Matthew Wade, who managed to score 2 hundreds (the only other Australian to manage any) and yet contrived to only total 337 at 33. They were also reliant on his runs in the 2 matches they actually won: Smith scored 2 hundreds at Edgbaston (the first out of a total of about 280), and a double hundred and 82 at Old Trafford (he was the last man dismissed in the first innings, the next highest score was 67). But unless he gets hit by a bus between now and the start of the series I'm unlikely to be proved wrong.
stewart12
Well-known member
- Jan 16, 2019
- 1,919
yes, I live in Sussex
Sussex County Cricket Club is still a "made up team"
it was just made up a long time ago
Comrade Sam
Comrade Sam
Just realised this thread is about cricket! I had assumed it was about how da yoofs in London had replaced saying 'a hundred percent' when agreeing with a statement, to just saying the rather stupid 'hundred, hundred!'
KeegansHairPiece
New member
- Jan 28, 2016
- 1,829
It's been an issue since T20 started whether you spread it out or not. Quite clearly for most players the riches on offer are in 20 overs. So if you have 18 teams just in England & Wales, each wanting a T20 squad, you've got 200+ places up for grabs, do well and you'll get a chance for the IPL, Big Bash, Caribbean PL etc. Lovely.
Labuschagne still has a 50+ average at Test level, and of course where did he hone his skills against the Duke ball...Glamorgan in the County Championship.
If you think it's all working fine at the moment, and the County Championship and Test formats are all in great health, then fair play to you, just leave it as it is. But honestly, anyone who loves the County Championship, the longer format and test cricket, it's not in good health. I'm approaching 50, but I'm a generation that was exposed to cricket, not just Tests on Grandstand, but County matches too on TV a lot. Scares me to death seeing half empty (pre-Covid) grounds for test matches, outside of England and Australia Test matches could be played on village greens there is so little interest.
Sid in the Sharknado
New member
In the 10 years or so following the start of the T20 Cup, plenty of players successfully made the step up from the championship to the test team. The issue is more complicated than players aiming to do well in t20 cricket. For that matter, one of the strengths of the 18 county set up is that the number of sides gives space for players who don't fit into the plans of their current side to move to another club who do have space for them.
Labuschagne is still only 18 matches into his career, he's a good player but it would be remarkable if he managed to sustain an average of 60 for a significant period - his fc average is 45. You've then got Warner (averages over 60 in Australia, sod all in most other parts of the world), and a load of dross who are reliant on those 3 to put a decent total together.
I've never once said that I think everything's fine, my major issue with The Hundred in particular is that the ECB have spent millions of pounds that they accumulated from the sky deals to try and fix the damage that keeping cricket off mainstream television has done, and have done so in a way that seems likely to undermine the first class system that the test team relies on.
In England at least, the reality is that crowds at test matches are better now than they were in the 70s, 80s or 90s. The championship hasn't been remotely profitable since the early 60s, if not earlier. Cricket in England has relied on the domestic one day cricket and the England team to be profitable for decades. When you consider that even in football a large number of teams depend on being pumped with money by the owner to play anywhere near the level they do, it's not really surprising. For that matter it's impressive that they managed to wrack up £70million or whatever it was of reserves in the first place.
As far as the rest of the world is concerned, while test crowds are worse in the West Indies or the subcontinent, in practice most of the people who went to those matches historically had paid the equivalent of about 10p to get in. Outside of England, India and Australia (every two years when either of the former teams tour) test cricket has never been profitable. But none of that's going to be fixed by changing the domestic set up in England.
If the ECB or any of the other boards really cared about cricket in other countries they would push to go back to sharing the revenue from tours between the host nation and the touring nation, because that's one of the major killers for the West Indies and Pakistan in particular.
KeegansHairPiece
New member
- Jan 28, 2016
- 1,829
With regard to your point in bold - exactly! That is what I said to you 4 posts ago, without India, Australia and England, Test cricket would be dead, it's not profitable or desirable for most cricket playing countries. They want ODIs and T20s and WE have to fight to get them to play Test Series. So in that regard your point is wrong, it is the responsibility of England, Australia and India to keep Test cricket alive - it is in their hands, and it is in the hands of our domestic game whether you believe that or not.
I do completely agree that subscription TV coverage is going to cost the long format of the game in the long run. Very few people actually got to see Ben Stokes winning an Ashes Test match. Whereas in 2005 the entire country watched Vaughan's men triumph, and every kid was out batting and bowling.
I'm also not defending the ECB either, so don't disagree with you there, but separating the Counties from the ECB when they run the County game together I just don't think is a fair reflection on how the game is being run and the power the Counties do actually have for many of these decisions.
The counties generally need money. What earns them the money? T20 / 100 or a four day game? It is the shorter versions of the game that puts punters bums on seats and attracts the TV coverage.
As with the BBL, we saw players called away from the Hundred to play Test cricket so the Test team still gets first call on players.
As the Hundred develops they will need to find a way to share games out amongst the counties. For example, Southern Brave could have the men playing at the Rose Bowl and the women at Hove. Or if they want to cover two home games, play the first tranche at Hove and the rest at Southampton. (Similar to how the KSL was organised with some of the Vipers games at Hove and others at Southampton (and a glorious day out in Arundel)).
Franchise cricket is here to stay. We are so far behind as Australia, India, WI now have established franchise competitions with PSL & BSL not so far behind.
At the end of the day, cricket has to structure itself in a way to attract fans and tv money. The franchise model has shown it is the way to go because it is the cricket punters want to watch.
As with the BBL, we saw players called away from the Hundred to play Test cricket so the Test team still gets first call on players.
As the Hundred develops they will need to find a way to share games out amongst the counties. For example, Southern Brave could have the men playing at the Rose Bowl and the women at Hove. Or if they want to cover two home games, play the first tranche at Hove and the rest at Southampton. (Similar to how the KSL was organised with some of the Vipers games at Hove and others at Southampton (and a glorious day out in Arundel)).
Franchise cricket is here to stay. We are so far behind as Australia, India, WI now have established franchise competitions with PSL & BSL not so far behind.
At the end of the day, cricket has to structure itself in a way to attract fans and tv money. The franchise model has shown it is the way to go because it is the cricket punters want to watch.
Greg Bobkin
Silver Seagull
- May 22, 2012
- 16,027
Sid in the Sharknado
New member
I think it's fair to say that in terms of wanting the best thing for the game, we're both sincerely after the same thing, even if we disagree on the detail of how to achieve it.
The ECB fundamentally don't care about test cricket, they are only interested in it insofar as it brings in money. Regardless of all the well meaning things they say, that's bourne out in their approach to the England teams and their dealings with other boards. If England, India and Australia really cared they would come to an arrangement to allow teams like the West Indies, South Africa etc. to pay their test cricketers properly so that they can become and remain competitive. The main relevance that English domestic cricket has in that regard is providing opportunities for the overseas players to develop by playing over the English summer.
The reality is that most of the funding is derived from the England team, and so almost all of the power in the ECB is based on the England team and the ECB executives, not the counties. That wasn't how things were set up until around about the late 90s, but it's been the case for over 20years now. Notwithstanding how badly a lot of the counties do in terms of engagement and drawing players from a wide base (and a lot of them could do an awful lot better) the responsibility for the domestic schedule and wider set up lies primarily with various central interests in the ECB and not the counties.
There are big differences with bbl franchise though because they created more sides than played first class cricket plus their population is focussed around small number of urban centres.
The odd thing is that the ecb don’t appear to care about test cricket but it is their biggest money spinner!
Greg Bobkin
Silver Seagull
- May 22, 2012
- 16,027
I see that The Hundred has done exactly what it set out to do – bring new people into the sport – but the flip side is that it's managed to irritate some cricket purists. Which is pretty much what I've said all along – if you're set in your ways about test match and four-day county cricket, then you're probably not the target audience.